|Ban Ki-Moon should|
ban Voodoo Science
AFTER DOHA, THE U.N. AND MEMBER GOVERNMENTS NEED SOBER SECOND THOUGHTS ABOUT ‘GLOBAL WARMING
Ottawa, Canada, December 9, 2012: “Governments must re-examine climate change science before considering further, more concrete commitments in the United Nations negotiating process,” said Tom Harris, executive director of the International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC), which is headquartered in Ottawa, Canada. “In their November 29th open letter to the U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, scientists from across the globe explained that the science relied upon by the U.N. is seriously flawed. Mr. Ban must no longer ignore such highly qualified advice.”
Among the statements supported by the now 134 scientist endorsers to the open letter were:
- “there has been no statistically significant global warming for almost 16 years. During this period…carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations rose by nearly 9%...Global warming that has not occurred cannot have caused the extreme weather of the past few years.”
- “Whether, when and how atmospheric warming will resume is unknown. The science is unclear.”
- “The hypothesis that our emissions of CO2 have caused, or will cause, dangerous warming is not supported by the evidence.”
- "the famed IPCC consensus about humans causing dangerous climate change is based upon the opinion of fewer expert scientists than have now written to the Secretary General challenging it,” said Carter. “That 134 experts now advise that “current scientific knowledge does not substantiate” alarm over global warming surely requires that the media and the public reassess the IPCC’s popular but scientifically misguided belief.”
The complete open letter to the U.N. Secretary General and the most recent list of signatories may be viewed at http://tinyurl.com/bat5exo.
Also published on NCTCS here
ICSC Chief Science Advisor Professor Bob Carter of James Cook University in Australia said, "Many researchers recognize that the always weak case for dangerous man-made global warming is getting weaker still as the science matures. Dr. Mike Hulme, a prominent climate scientist and U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) insider, has admitted that ‘only a few dozen experts in the specific field of detection and attribution studies’ reached the IPCC “consensus” about human influence on the climate, not thousands as is commonly implied by the panel (see p. 10, 11 of Hulme’s April 12, 2010 paper in “Progress in Physical Geography” at http://tinyurl.com/2b3cq3r).
“So the famed IPCC consensus about humans causing dangerous climate change is based upon the opinion of fewer expert scientists than have now written to the Secretary General challenging it,” said Carter. “That 134 experts now advise that “current scientific knowledge does not substantiate” alarm over global warming surely requires that the media and the public reassess the IPCC’s popular but scientifically misguided belief.”
Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, Scotland, an Expert Reviewer of the next IPCC Assessment due in 2014 added, “The imagined 'consensus' did not predict 16 full years without any global warming. The supposed 'consensus' did not forecast that sea level would fall last year. The pretended 'consensus' is wrong.”
“Even if it were right,” Monckton continued, “spending trillions in futile attempts to mitigate 'global warming' today is at least ten times more expensive and less cost-effective than spending millions the day after tomorrow to focus adaptation to any damage that a little warmer weather might cause. The game is up and the scare is over."
"Whether you are socialist or capitalist, industrialist or environmentalist, no one wants to pour money down the drain. Yet, that is exactly what is happening as a result of the global warming scare,” said ICSC Energy Issues Advisor Bryan Leyland of New Zealand. “Expensive and ineffective alternative energy projects such as wind turbines and solar cells are receiving massive subsidies from governments and electricity consumers in the belief that they will reduce GHG emissions that, as is now well established, do not cause dangerous global warming. It is disgraceful.”
The open letter to the Secretary General ended:
“We also ask that you acknowledge that policy actions by the U.N., or by the signatory nations to the UNFCCC, that aim to reduce CO2 emissions are unlikely to exercise any significant influence on future climate. Climate policies therefore need to focus on preparation for, and adaptation to, all dangerous climatic events however caused.”
Harris concluded, “As is well demonstrated by the Nongovernmental International Climate Panel on Climate Change (www.nipccreport.org), warming alarmism is a not based on a correct interpretation of the science. The climate scare has been fuelled largely by computer-generated representations that bear little relationship to the real world. Governments must divert the billions of dollars being wasted trying to stop climate change towards the real concerns of society.”
Elsewhere Professor Carter recently wrote:
What is lacking ............... is even a trace of evidence (as opposed to computer model projections) that atmospheric carbon dioxide, let along human-related emissions, have anything to do with the matter.